Poll: No Role for Government in Schiavo Case

ABC News ^ | March 21, 2005 | GARY LANGER

[Dog Gone]

Federal Intervention in Schiavo Case Prompts Broad Public Disapproval

Analysis by GARY LANGER

Mar. 21, 2005 - Americans broadly and strongly disapprove of federal intervention in the Terri Schiavo case, with sizable majorities saying Congress is overstepping its bounds for political gain.

The public, by 63 percent-28 percent, supports the removal of Schiavo's feeding tube, and by a 25-point margin opposes a law mandating federal review of her case. Congress passed such legislation and President Bush signed it early today.

That legislative action is distinctly unpopular: Not only do 60 percent oppose it, more -- 70 percent -- call it inappropriate for Congress to get involved in this way. And by a lopsided 67 percent-19 percent, most think the elected officials trying to keep Schiavo alive are doing so more for political advantage than out of concern for her or for the principles involved.

This ABC News poll also finds that the Schiavo case has prompted an enormous level of personal discussion: Half of Americans say that as a direct result of hearing about this case, they've spoken with friends or family members about what they'd want done if they were in a similar condition. Nearly eight in 10 would not want to be kept alive.

Intensity

In addition to the majority, the intensity of public sentiment is also on the side of Schiavo's husband, who has fought successfully in the Florida courts to remove her feeding tube. And intensity runs especially strongly against congressional involvement.

Included among the 63 percent who support removing the feeding tube are 42 percent who "strongly" support it -- twice as many as strongly oppose it. And among the 70 percent who call congressional intervention inappropriate are 58 percent who hold that view strongly -- an especially high level of strong opinion.

GOP Groups

Views on this issue are informed more by ideological and religious views than by political partisanship. Republicans overall look much like Democrats and independents in their opinions.

But two core Republican groups -- conservatives and evangelical Protestants -- are more divided: Fifty-four percent of conservatives support removal of Schiavo's feeding tube, compared with seven in 10 moderates and liberals. And evangelical Protestants divide about evenly -- 46 percent are in favor of removing the tube, 44 percent opposed. Among non-evangelical Protestants, 77 percent are in favor -- a huge division between evangelical and mainline Protestants.

Conservatives and evangelicals also are more likely to support federal intervention in the case, although it doesn't reach a majority in either group. Indeed, conservative Republicans oppose involving the federal courts, by 57 percent-41 percent.

Conservatives and evangelicals hold these views even though most people in both groups -- 73 percent and 68 percent, respectively -- say that if they personally were in this condition, they would not want to be kept alive.

Should Feeding Tube Be Removed?
	Support	Oppose
Non-evangelical	77%	18
Evangelical	46	44
Catholics	63	26
Liberals	68	24
Moderates	69	22
Conservatives	54	40
Democrats	65	25
Independents	63	28
Republicans	61	34
Conservative Reps.	55	40

Regardless of their preference on the Schiavo case, about two-thirds of conservatives and evangelicals alike call congressional intervention inappropriate. And majorities in both groups, as in others, are skeptical of the motivations of the political leaders seeking to extend Schiavo's life.

Should Federal Government Intervene?
	Support	Oppose
Non-evangelical	26%	71
Evangelical	44	50
Catholics	38	56
Liberals	34	62
Moderates	29	67
Conservatives	48	49
Democrats	34	63
Independents	31	61
Republicans	39	58
Conservative Reps.	41	57

Preference and Experience

Public views on this issue are informed in part by Americans' preferences for their own care if they were in a similar situation: Sixteen percent would want life support; as noted, 78 percent would not. While still a very large majority, that's down from 87 percent in an ABC News/Washington Poll last week.

Among people who favor removing Schiavo's life support, 94 percent say that's also what they would want for themselves. By contrast, people who oppose removing the feeding tube in Schiavo's case divide about evenly on what they'd want for themselves: Forty-five percent would want life support, 41 percent would not.

Some speak from experience: A third of Americans say they've had friends or family members who passed away in a hospital or other care facility after life support was removed; nearly two in 10 say they were personally involved in that decision. People who've been personally involved in such a decision are more apt than others to support removing Schiavo's feeding tube and to say they personally would not want life support.

Age and Attention

There are differences among age groups. Senior citizens are more apt than others to strongly support removing Schiavo's feeding tube, and also more apt to oppose federal intervention. And young adults are less likely to say that, as a result of the Schiavo case, they've discussed their own wishes with family or friends.

Just under six in 10 Americans are closely following the Schiavo case, including 16 percent who've been following it very closely -- a respectable albeit not overwhelming level of public attention. Young adults, age 18 to 29, are less than half as likely as their elders to be following the case closely -- just 27 percent are doing so. There's an irony in that result: Schiavo herself was stricken at age 26.

Methodology

This ABC News poll was conducted by telephone March 20, 2005, among a random national sample of 501 adults. The results have a 4.5-point error margin. Sampling, data collection and tabulation by TNS Intersearch of Horsham, Pa.

[jmc813]

Since most of the same extremists supporting THAT outcome also are the ones who brought about this fiasco, don't hold your breath. Lawmakers don't listen well to fanatics, especially after polls come out.

I've noticed you've used the terms "extremist", "fanatic", and "extreme right" quite a bit. Since the vast majority of freepers disagree with your take on the situation, do you consider FR to be an extremist right wing forum?

[Just mythoughts]

"There has been no denial of the memo, however..."


""From a previous post of yours. Thanks for admitting that you were wrong.""

I see you make a habit of distortion. Your methods are showing.

"You have been on the loosing side of this debate..."

""Not according to the polls. But by all means, keep dreaming and ranting.""

You hold fast to those polls cause they will keep you warm at night.

" you need the evidence you go find it, I'll be watching your method of operation."

""No need, you yourself admitted above that they didn't deny the memo. You must have simply forgotten to apologize for the misstatement.""


Not even a clever attempt at deception. Wow, you now can fit into the category of accuser, deceiver, and destroyer. You have served yourself well.

[Just mythoughts]

Rush is talking about your precious poll...... You better go join the liberals fast.

[Long Cut]

I posted some of my line of thinking HERE.

Calling those of us who do not agree with the way this thing has gone "a pro-death contingent" is a perfect example of what I was talking about. You've chosen to label people into a neat little box.

Many's the time I've shaken my head to find myself on the same side as robertpaulsen in this. But, that's where the evidence and facts have led me. I also quite clearly see the overall damage this WILL do to my party.

Debate if you want, but I'll no more respond to the "pro-death" crap in this instance than I would if RP called me a drug addict because I do not support the WOD, either.

[Long Cut]

"You better go join the liberals fast."

You first. You're the one who wants the government involved here, not me.

You also one of those calling for the national Guard to be called out?

[Bones75]

Great point..but it isn't about YOU!!!..Its about the governments right to starve someone to DEATH!...let me ask you...would you rather be starved to death of shot in the head?...if her husband shot her he'd be charged with murder...if the judicial starves her to death...all is ok...Sound like the right answer to you?

The removal of a feeding tube to allow death happens all the time in America. You just don't hear about it because there are no opportunist politicians making a big deal out of it.

[Just mythoughts]

"You first. You're the one who wants the government involved here, not me."

You are delusional, Congress acts Constitutionally and you come unglued.



"You also one of those calling for the national Guard to be called out?"

What are you talking about?

[Long Cut]

"do you consider FR to be an extremist right wing forum?"

A fair question. I consider FR to be a conservative political forum which therefore tends to include the more extremist rightwingers in its membership.

It thus is far MORE rightwing than the overall population. The forum as a whole is not what I would call "extremist", however sometimes it seems to go that way on several issues.

Did I answer your question?

[jmc813]

Calling those of us who do not agree with the way this thing has gone "a pro-death contingent" is a perfect example of what I was talking about. You've chosen to label people into a neat little box.

Perhaps that was a bit strong. Allow me to reword that to "the folks on FR who feel the feeding tube should remain disconnected."

Many's the time I've shaken my head to find myself on the same side as robertpaulsen in this.

This issue has certainly created strange bedfellows. For instance, I disagree strongly with Cultural Jihad and Dane on the illegal immigration issue, but I am in total agreement with them on these threads. In fact, I've gotta give them both credi for posting some very good, eloquent points in the last few days.

Debate if you want, but I'll no more respond to the "pro-death" crap in this instance than I would if RP called me a drug addict because I do not support the WOD, either.

Paulsen doesn't typically name call like that. There are plenty of pro-WOD posters that do though.

[Long Cut]

Let's see...you claimed that the memo was denied. Then, presented with a statement that acknowledged its existence, you "moved the goalposts".

Then you pointedly ignored the request for a cite to the "denial", while ADMITTING that none existed in another post.

Then you flung mud in an attempt to hide the above, and get in yet another amusing rant.

Yep, you're performing exactly as I expected.

[Long Cut]

I was just using that as an example. Not tryin' to diss paulsen.

[Just mythoughts]

There you go again, planting distortion, seeds of deception and smearing accusations.

You obviously have no evidence that the GOP LEADERSHIP sent this memo out and you know that because there is none.

Yet you continue to muddy the water, using the favorite method of operation the clintons perfected.

[Long Cut]

"Congress acts Constitutionally..."

What part of the Constitution gives them the power to overturn a state court's ruling? What part gives them the power to intervene in a state's judicial proceedings?

And now that they have apparently seized that power, what part of the Constitution limits it?

[Notwithstanding]

Wow - your rage makes me wonder if you have guilt issues about having pulled the plug on someone.

[Just mythoughts]

"What part of the Constitution gives them the power to overturn a state court's ruling? What part gives them the power to intervene in a state's judicial proceedings?"


Again what are you talking about, "overturn a state court's ruling". That is a false statement. Check out who it was that created this beast. Article 3.

"And now that they have apparently seized that power, what part of the Constitution limits it?"


"SEIZED"???? What a flawed concept, to accuse the Congress seized something that the Constitution provides.

[tdewey10]

This Poll just shows that a lot of people don't know the real story. Anyone who really knows what is going on, knows that it is Michael Schiavo who should have nothing to do with the decision to remove the feeding tube, not the Government.

And of course it is the MSM that is responsible for misinforming so many people.

[devolve]

2004 push-polls

Nov 2004 exit push-polls

Zogby Nov 2004 push-polls

oversampled democrats, urban voters, democrat areas

they were heavily weighted all for Kerry




but this one is different I'm sure

[Notwithstanding]

I suppose the truth does sort of give me a thrill. The truth is exhilerating.

Why are you afraid to discuss what is going on here (the woman is currently being _____starved to death_______, after all, with no proof that she ever expressly stated she would want a feeding tube removed in order to starve to death if she were to end up in her current state of health).

[Long Cut]

"You obviously have no evidence that the GOP LEADERSHIP sent this memo out and you know that because there is none."

LOL! Moving those goalposts must tire your back out. To refresh your memory, I never made any claims regarding the memo. I only asked for a cite to the "denial". It was YOU who claimed a denial that didn't exist. And you apparently do not wish to deal with the fact that they have admitted its existance WITHOUT denying that they sent it out.

You made a claim. It was false. You even ADMITTED it was false, though you "forgot" to take it back and tried to shift the subject. So typical.

The rest of your post is your usual squealing.

And you somehow think you've "won" something.

And people wonder why I have a hard time taking ANYTHING people like you say seriously.

[Long Cut]

Just like I thought...all bluster and no cites to Constitutional provisions granting Congress the power to intervene in a state court's internal matters, OR to order federal review of a case.

Or even something LIMITING this new power. I guess now ALL state court matters will now be turned federal, in your utopia.

I don't wonder at all why this poll indicates what it does. And now I am certain that subsequent polls will also indicate the same.